Consumer Watchdog Challenges Presidential Tariffs with Legal Briefs in San Francisco and Washington

On July 8, 2025, Consumer Watchdog took a remarkable step towards defending consumer rights by submitting amicus curiae briefs in two critical legal cases that challenge the authority of President Trump to impose tariffs without congressional approval. These briefs were filed in the Ninth Circuit, located in San Francisco, and the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. The organization's main argument revolves around the assertion that the Presidential tariffs, enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), overstep the boundaries laid out by the Constitution.

Consumer Watchdog's filings refer to two ongoing cases: Newsom v. Trump, No. 25-3493 and V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, Nos. 25-1812 25-1813. By urging the courts to nullify these tariffs, they are advocating for a necessary restoration of the constitutional balance of power. According to Consumer Watchdog, the current usage of IEEPA does not specifically authorize tariffs and is marked by vague guidelines that fail to limit presidential authority.

William Pletcher, the Litigation Director at Consumer Watchdog, voiced strong concerns regarding the potential implications of these tariffs. He noted, "These tariffs operate as an unchecked tax on American consumers, going well beyond what the Constitution permits without proper congressional authorization." The organization's stance highlights the potential repercussions for families and small businesses, suggesting that unchecked executive power could lead to severe financial impacts on the average American.

The legal team behind the briefs includes Alan Morrison, an expert in constitutional law and the Lerner Family Associate Dean at The George Washington University Law School. Morrison has an impressive track record, having argued twenty cases before the Supreme Court. He emphasized the importance of maintaining the separation of powers, noting that without clear limitations, congressional delegation of authority could lead to constitutional violations. Alongside him is Will Planert, a reputable partner at Morris, Manning & Martin LLP, known for his experience in complex federal trade litigation.

In their briefs, Consumer Watchdog highlights that a loose interpretation of IEEPA to allow unilateral tariff impositions without congressional oversight risks infringing on the essential checks and balances within the government. The organization is actively urging the courts to consider recent Supreme Court rulings regarding separation of powers and to adopt a more restrictive interpretation of IEEPA to avoid future constitutional conflicts.

Consumer Watchdog is fundamentally a non-profit and non-partisan organization committed to advocating for consumer rights and holding the government accountable. Through these legal challenges, they are not only defending individual consumers but also reaffirming the importance of legislative oversight in financial decisions that can affect millions.

The outcome of these cases could significantly shape the future of economic policy in the United States, particularly regarding the balance between executive power and legislative authority. The growing concern among advocates is that allowing tariffs to be imposed in such a manner could pave the way for more serious overreach by subsequent administrations.

For those interested in viewing the briefs, they have been made available on Consumer Watchdog's website, emphasizing transparency in their litigation efforts. As the legal proceedings go forward, all eyes will be on these pivotal cases that may redefine the contours of financial authority in the American political landscape.

Topics Policy & Public Interest)

【About Using Articles】

You can freely use the title and article content by linking to the page where the article is posted.
※ Images cannot be used.

【About Links】

Links are free to use.